Forgive me if this has been brought up in the previous 31 pages, but I was a little confused about the Celtic Sea Territory.

Some maps that have a 'loose 1 per turn territory' specify that it either goes down to 1 or will revert to neutral 1 id you only have 1 army there. After playing it, I thought that adding in that it it only reduces your forces to 1 would clarify things.

william.paul wrote:Forgive me if this has been brought up in the previous 31 pages, but I was a little confused about the Celtic Sea Territory.

Some maps that have a 'loose 1 per turn territory' specify that it either goes down to 1 or will revert to neutral 1 id you only have 1 army there. After playing it, I thought that adding in that it it only reduces your forces to 1 would clarify things.

Regions that lose 1 troop per turn (or any specific number of troops per turn) stop when you have only one troop left. They do not revert to neutral. Regions which revert to neutral at the start of the turn of the player holding them ("killer neutrals") do exactly that: no matter how many troops you leave on them, they revert to their starting neutral value when you start your turn. They do not revert to the starting neutral value unless a player holds them: if someone weakens them without taking them, they stay weak.

The Celtic Sea region starts as a neutral with one troop, and loses one troop per turn when held by any player.

Does it occur to you that the Kernow bonus is a little too good, being 2 territories for +2 and being protected by neutrals?In two teams games, my opponents dropped both territories in Kernow, and now they will surely take and hold it.

There are 2 neutrals to go through to get to Kernow:1) Stonehenge, of course, is worthless as a bonus in a team game; And as a neutral 3, it is brutal to go through in order to break Kernow2) Ynysek Syllan is a bit better, being a neutral 2.

Either way, the team that does not take Kernow is pretty much fucked

Changing it to +1 would be okay, but it will still be unbalanced. The only way to balance it is to allow Kernow to be attacked without having to go through neutrals. Perhaps change Ynysek Syllan to a regular territory?

By the way, I imagine this issue will be the same with 1v1s, unless a territory in Kernow is dropped neutral

Does it occur to you that the Kernow bonus is a little too good, being 2 territories for +2 and being protected by neutrals?In two teams games, my opponents dropped both territories in Kernow, and now they will surely take and hold it.

There are 2 neutrals to go through to get to Kernow:1) Stonehenge, of course, is worthless as a bonus in a team game; And as a neutral 3, it is brutal to go through in order to break Kernow2) Ynysek Syllan is a bit better, being a neutral 2.

Either way, the team that does not take Kernow is pretty much fucked

Changing it to +1 would be okay, but it will still be unbalanced. The only way to balance it is to allow Kernow to be attacked without having to go through neutrals. Perhaps change Ynysek Syllan to a regular territory?

By the way, I imagine this issue will be the same with 1v1s, unless a territory in Kernow is dropped neutral

I want to keep Kernow +2, because I think +1 is too small for it being in the crossroads of the map. I need to leave at least 1 neutral in the bonus to keep people from dropping it right off the bat. Ynsyek Syllen seems like an obvious choice because even if someone doesn't go for the bonus it will soon be broken by people traveling from on end of the map to another. Maybe Stonehenge could be dropped to only having 2 neutrals but I don't think that will make much of a difference and I think that would make it too easy to score that +1 auto deploy.

this map has copyright infringement. that celtic tree symbol is original artwork by Jen Delyth titled 'tree of life' and is not part of the public domain, despite the fact that people all over the net are using it illegally without permission.

Ruh-Roh! Hmm I suppose I can ask permission. Looking on the site it has a section for non-commercial use. She might ok it, I'm not really sure. Worst case scenario I just change it to something else. What do you think?

The Bison King wrote:I want to keep Kernow +2, because I think +1 is too small for it being in the crossroads of the map. I need to leave at least 1 neutral in the bonus to keep people from dropping it right off the bat. Ynsyek Syllen seems like an obvious choice because even if someone doesn't go for the bonus it will soon be broken by people traveling from on end of the map to another. Maybe Stonehenge could be dropped to only having 2 neutrals but I don't think that will make much of a difference and I think that would make it too easy to score that +1 auto deploy.

Sorry, I didnt realize Ynsysek Syllen was part of Kernow! That makes it much more balanced.I'll let you know if I see anything else; sorry about the mix-up.

The Bison King wrote:Ruh-Roh! Hmm I suppose I can ask permission. Looking on the site it has a section for non-commercial use. She might ok it, I'm not really sure. Worst case scenario I just change it to something else. What do you think?

i say get the permission or change it.The terms of use says it can be used only for non commercial use and used only as link that points back to the owner site. You can't use it in any other way without owner permission.

I do NOT visit this site and I'm NOT Team CC anymore.All PMs are autobinned. If you need to contact me, you should already have a way to do it without using this site.Thanks to those who helped me through the years.

The Bison King wrote:Ruh-Roh! Hmm I suppose I can ask permission. Looking on the site it has a section for non-commercial use. She might ok it, I'm not really sure. Worst case scenario I just change it to something else. What do you think?

i say get the permission or change it.The terms of use says it can be used only for non commercial use and used only as link that points back to the owner site. You can't use it in any other way without owner permission.

The Bison King wrote:I'll contact her tomorrow. A couple questions I need to know first.

When I'm talking to her an I representing myself, or the Conquer Club as a whole?

and

Does this in anyway count as commercial use by being on this site?

If you make contact, it will be in your own capacity as an artist who has created a map image that has recently been used on CC. Your use of the image is not commercial (ie you have not been paid and it does not generate an income for you), although I guess that in some shape or form it may help to generate income for CC?

Just be completely open and honest, and say that you developed the image yourself, and that you were unaware that the symbol was held under copyright until today; hence your request for permission to continue using it. Also state that you will happily substitute an alternative image if they would prefer.

PB: 2661 | He's blue...If he were green he would die | No mod would be stupid enough to do that

I didn't feel like sorting through 31 pages, so forgive me if this has been brought up. I have played this map numerous times and think that the Alba bonus is too easily defended with Isle of Man starting out as a neutral. If the drop is bad, a game can be decided fairly quickly similar to Aus on Classic. I'd like to see Isle of Man not be worth +1 for holding it and the starting neutral be removed. In doing this, it would neutralize the Alba bonus from being so hard to take. As it stands it's too easily defended with stonehenge and Isle of man being neutrals. This leaves 2 ways in that aren't protected by neutrals. Maybe I'm out of line, but I think it would vastly improve the map and balance the gameplay a little more.

MNDuke wrote:I didn't feel like sorting through 31 pages, so forgive me if this has been brought up. I have played this map numerous times and think that the Alba bonus is too easily defended with Isle of Man starting out as a neutral. If the drop is bad, a game can be decided fairly quickly similar to Aus on Classic. I'd like to see Isle of Man not be worth +1 for holding it and the starting neutral be removed. In doing this, it would neutralize the Alba bonus from being so hard to take. As it stands it's too easily defended with stonehenge and Isle of man being neutrals. This leaves 2 ways in that aren't protected by neutrals. Maybe I'm out of line, but I think it would vastly improve the map and balance the gameplay a little more.

MNDuke wrote:I didn't feel like sorting through 31 pages, so forgive me if this has been brought up. I have played this map numerous times and think that the Alba bonus is too easily defended with Isle of Man starting out as a neutral. If the drop is bad, a game can be decided fairly quickly similar to Aus on Classic. I'd like to see Isle of Man not be worth +1 for holding it and the starting neutral be removed. In doing this, it would neutralize the Alba bonus from being so hard to take. As it stands it's too easily defended with stonehenge and Isle of man being neutrals. This leaves 2 ways in that aren't protected by neutrals. Maybe I'm out of line, but I think it would vastly improve the map and balance the gameplay a little more.